his "contributions" so memorable that people "should" remember them? I think
not, I have to prick that bubble. The message I replied to seemed obnoxious
to me and I responded. And so I will assume that his previous
"contributions" were obnoxious as well.
Again, an e-mail address "right on the newsgroup message" does not have to
be the one from the person signing the message. Otherwise, why sign?
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hal S." <h.sanders@comcast.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: Newsgroup impersonality
""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:026501c5a12b$186d0230$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
With apologies, but do you really think I can be bothered studying your
e-mails?
-------------------------------------
Leo: who said anything about email? You have my address right on the
newsgroup message. Just look a few lines down; you should be able to
figure it out.
Hal S.
--------------------------------------
I look at the signature, that is what counts, who says you are not using
your mother's, your wife's or your son's computer? Which means that the
signature and the e-mail address displayed may not apply to the same
person. And I hope you appreciate these messages are about the attacks on
Peter Stewart, not you.
With best wishes
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hal S." <h.sanders@comcast.net
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 9:29 AM
Subject: Re: Newsgroup impersonality
Leo: As I told you in answer to your email, you are really dense. What
do you mean "Hal who?" I sign all my postings "Hal S.", and even you
can read my email address in my postings, which begins "H.Sanders." Put
them together and what do you get? Does that sound like "Pen name?
Pseudonym? Someone in hiding?" (sic) Even you should be able to figure
that out. You have really demonstrated in your recent screeds a
pronounced inability to comprehend.
Hal S.
""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:017701c5a0b3$c66d9e30$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
Hal who? Pen name? Pseudonym? Someone in hiding?
Peter Stewart _only_ contributes as Peter Stewart, and whether that
name is on his birth certificate is no-ones business.
What I find cowardly is to attack a person who is away and cannot
defend himself.
Also cowardly is when people are being asked pertinent questions about
their own statements and they refuse to give an answer and use as
excuse there "need" to know whether the reply is directed at Tom, Dick
or Harry, and whether Tom is Dick and not Harry. Name tags are not
important substance is.
Richardson proclaiming we are here to make friends is the first one to
offend.
Humour the questioner by supplying answers and _show_ you have nothing
to hide, no unqualifications to cover up. Own up to what you can do and
what you do know, then others are very kind and will help to fill the
gaps.
Richardson wants genealogically filled messages, but he is the first to
start sniping and continue flames which have nothing to do with
genealogy.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2005 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: Newsgroup impersonality
Hal S. wrote:
I agree; it's pretty gutless to fire away with insults and then hide
behind
a phony name.
Hal S.
Yes, Hal, I agree. It's very gutless. No one likes a coward.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net